Wednesday, June 13, 2007

(following Board of Health)

Commissioners' Conference Room

APPROVED 3/4/2009


Commissioner Faye Stewart presided with Commissioners Bill Dwyer, Bill Fleenor, Bobby Green, Sr., and Peter Sorenson present.  County Administrator Bill Van Vactor, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.




Fleenor requested Consent Calendar items 4 D1 and 4 D2 be pulled for comments.  Green added 7 b under Commissioners’ Business regarding information from Amber Fossen.  Stewart added item 7 b a letter of support for LCOG for a federal grant and 7 c staff direction on addressing Van Vactor’s retirement.  Sorenson asked for a discussion of the Board’s summer road tour meetings.  Item 10 a is a discussion item.




Leah Patton,  Florence, said for more than 50 years she has been involved in government.  She said the single most important trait anyone could have is integrity.  She said that the commissioners are about to nominate current Mayor of Florence, Phil Brubaker for the Regional Investment Board. She opposed the nomination of Brubaker for that position.  She believes that Brubaker has misled local citizens regarding issues of importance to the community.  She didn’t think Brubaker was the wisest choice for the position.


Richard Bruce Jarvis, Florence, had concerns about the appointment of Mayor Brubaker.  He commented that under Mayor Brubaker the city is wrapped in controversy, including a financial conflict of interest.  He didn’t think that Brubaker was a good choice at this point.


Dawn Lesley, Eugene, supported an increase in a waste management tipping fee.   She said as a citizen she is concerned about the deterioration of much of the public infrastructure and services and Waste Management is a department that works.  She commented that responsible planning and carefully administered pay-as-you-go services have resulted in a healthy pro-active system that protects the health and environment.  She said the County’s Waste Management Department needs to charge fees that support present and future landfill operations and encourages waste production and diversion with recycling as much as possible.  She encouraged the Board to raise the fee.


Bill McConochie, Eugene, said research by poling of random samples of local citizens could yield information that would let the Board understand voters and help them understand County government.  He said the poling should be in considerable detail to clarify issues including what services citizens want prioritized and what services the County has mandated and resources to deliver.  He indicated that citizens want affordable education, health care and housing more than improve roads and public safety.


Marsha Miller, City of Eugene, said she is the Building and Permit Services Manager at the City of Eugene including public waste and recycling programs.  She said she is also on Lane County’s Resource Recovery and Advisory Committee. She supported the proposed increase in Lane County’s disposal fees. She commented that the current disposal fee is too low to provide enough incentive to change waste habits.  She thought there should be an increase because there hasn’t been an increase in tipping fees in over 12 years.  She added the city hasn’t increased rates since 2001 and the commercial rates haven’t increased since 2003.  She stated by increasing the rates now, they can create stability in the future.


Nancy Nichols, Deadwood, read about the cuts dealing with the budget shortfall. She noted that one proposed cut was elimination of an assessor.  She advocated against reducing the Assessor’s budget.  She said it needs a short term increase in funding, not a cut.  She indicated that four years ago she built a new home and it has yet to be assessed so she is not paying property taxes.  She wanted the department to eliminate the backlog so everyone pays a fair share.


Julie Daniel, Director of Bring Recycling, Eugene, supported the waste management increase.  She urged the Board to consider a larger increase than what is being requested and to put tip fees in the $75 to $90 ton range in order to leverage waste based job creation and economic development opportunities for the community.  She indicated that ten times as many jobs are created when waste is recycled instead of dumped.  She stated the County has made a wise investment by allocating economic development dollars to reuse and recycling enterprises and to leverage that with higher tip fees to provide incentive for waste base businesses. 


Lorraine Kerwood, Eugene, stated she is the Chair of the Resource Recovery Advisory Committee.  She asked the Board to raise the tipping fee more than what staff is suggesting.  She commented that it should cost more to waste than to re-use and recycle and presently the County filling the landfill is the easy way to go. She stated that an increase in the tipping fee will encourage recycling that is in everyone’s best interest.


Curtis Williams, Eugene,  read a letter to the Board about the Emerald Valley Paintball Club.  He said it is time the County recognizes paintball as a legitimate form of recreation and to support them in their efforts to provide a regulated and designated outdoor field. He indicated that they have obtained permission from property owners throughout Lane County and the surrounding area to use their properties.  He added that the property owners are not receiving any monetary gain and the Emerald Valley Paintball Club receives no income other than dues the members pay to be part of the club.  He said if the County finds that paintball activities are illegal, they requested that they be notified as soon as possible so they may be able to make changes if necessary.  He said it is their goal to find a permanent and designated field to enjoy the sport.


Jim Gillette, Eugene, wanted to see a paintball club.  He said he will be the first landowner to donate his property for the club.  He said the things he was fined for were untrue.  He said he paid $16,000 and wants a hearing or his money back.


Terry McDonald, Eugene, recalled on March 14 he brought to the Board a thank you plaque for the Heart for Homeless event.  Today he came and brought each commissioner an award.  He thanked the Board for help on rural housing.  He commented that it was good business to have the tipping fees higher.  He said it creates jobs and encourages diversion of products out of the waste stream.  He added that places that have higher tipping fees have better business.  He encouraged the Board to raise the fees.


Philip Stallings, Eugene, stated that he is a former Resource Recovery Advisory Committee member and he supports increasing the tipping fee beyond the recommended staff level.  He said it increases the financial incentive for improved recyclable diversion rates.








A. Approval of Minutes:  None.


B. Health and Human Services


1) ORDER 07-6-13-1/In the Matter of Awarding a Contract to UNI/CARE, Inc. in Response  to RFP No. H&HS 20277 for a Health and Human Services Management Information System in the Amount Not to Exceed $597,909.


2) ORDER 07-6-13-2/In the Matter of Reinstatement of One Member to the Lane County Health Advisory Committee.


C. Public Works


1) ORDER 07-6-13-3/In the Matter of Awarding Requirement Contracts to Various Contractors to Establish Unit Prices for Asphaltic Mix Patching Material Needs During the Period of 7/1/07 to 6/30/08, Contract No. 07/08-M&S-53.


2) ORDER 07-6-13-4/In the Matter of Amending the On-Call Bridge and Special Services Agreement with Otak, Inc.


3) ORDER 07-6-13-5/In the Matter of Awarding a Three Year Requirements Contract to PetroCard Systems, Inc., for the Purchase of Cardlock Fuel and Fueling Services in Florence, Contract No. RFP06/07 FS-02.


MOTION: to approve the balance of the Consent Calendar.


Green MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.


VOTE: 4-0 (Dwyer out of room).


4 B.1


Fleenor asked if this was People Soft compatible.


Rob Rockstroh, Health and Human Services, said they do millions in billing and this is getting to where the public safety system currently is.  He added that it is allowing them to collect client data and tracking and they are not able to currently do that.


Fleenor asked if it was a double billing.


Rockstroh responded that it was meant to be a clinic management system.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 07-6-13-1


Fleenor MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.


VOTE: 4-0 (Dwyer out of room).




Fleenor said he wanted a discussion about the membership makeup.  He said as per their decision to make all of their committees uniform, there are 12 members on this committee.  He asked if they should continue with the 12 members or to retract to 5 plus 2 members.


Rockstroh said the statutory requirements for this didn’t work in the model the Board chose.  He said the Board of Commissioners is the Board of  Health and they have to have a dentist and doctor on the committee, as they are statutory positions.  He indicated it is ruled by ORS. 431.412.  He said they treated the Health Advisory Committee as a surrogate Board of Health.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 07-6-13-2




VOTE: 5-0.












a. ORDER 07-6-6-3/In the Matter of Ordering the Appointment of a Lane County Local Government Member of the Benton, Lane, Lincoln, Linn Regional Investment Board.


Stewart recalled that this item was pulled off the Consent Calendar last week regarding the appointment of a government member.  He indicated two people applied for the position:  Mayor Phil Brubaker and Mayor Don Hampton.  He said through the voting, Mayor Brubaker was recommended to be appointed to the Regional Investment Board.


MOTION: to approve Phil Brubaker for appointment to the Regional Investment Board.


Green MOVED, Stewart SECONDED.


Stewart said he has respect for Mayor Brubaker and he was concerned about the acquisitions that have been made against him.


VOTE: 2-3 (Fleenor, Sorenson, Dwyer dissenting).


MOTION: to approve ORDER 07-6-6-3 with Don Hampton as the member of the Regional  Investment Board.


Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.


VOTE: 4-1 (Green dissenting).


b. DISCUSSION/Signing a Letter in Support of LCOG’s Application for a Federal

Grant for Integrating Transportation and Resource Planning for Highway 126 West Corridor Between the Eugene Urban Growth Boundary and the City of Veneta’s West Urban Growth Boundary


MOTION: to approve signing a letter in support.


Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.


Tom Stinchfield, Public Works, explained that ODOT would put up $50,000 of the match.  He said the package would be $50,000 in cash from ODOT, $20,000 in cash from the city of Veneta.  He said the County’s role would be County staff participation, using some in-kind match.  He said they are assuming from the County’s interest in ODOT issues that the Board wants the County to be a player and the County staff should participate.  He stated that this is a first step study that would provide an environmental base line.  He added that it is not the beginning of a formal ODOT project development process.  He said the 126 corridor is important to Lane County and to the state because it connects Highway 101 and the I-5 corridor.


VOTE: 5-0.


c. Information about Failed Measure


Green requested allowing Amber Fossen, Public Information Officer, to do research on the last failed measures they put forth to the public.  He was at AOC last week and they have been successful in passing measures.  He said one of the strategies they avoid is to not use language such as if the measure doesn’t pass they will eliminate services.  He said they had done testing and it was proven that it is unsuccessful as it comes across as a threat to the people.  He wanted to go back to look at the messages they put out, to see if the message was consistent and part of a trend on how they put messages out to the public.


Fleenor thought it was a good idea. He thought it should be linked to the Listening Tour.


Sorenson thought it was good information to have and an analysis of the May election would be helpful.  He recalled that Lane County voters did pass one of two measures that were in front of them.  He said the charter amendment was passed by the voters.   



d. Discussion on Announced Retirement


Greta Utecht, Human Resources, discussed different proposals on hiring a replacement for  County Administrator Bill Van Vactor


Van Vactor indicated that he would not participate in this process after today.  He recommended using a national search.  He thought communication was the key role for the administrator.  He gave his retirement notice but he offered  to stay on with the County at his current hourly rate up to December 31.


MOTION: to accept Van Vactor’s offer to stay on.




VOTE: 5-0.


d. Listening Tour


Stewart recommended that each commissioner choose one date and location to do an initial listening tour.  He asked to choose dates in July or August and they will get something that will work for each commissioner.


Sorenson encouraged the Board to think about a Tuesday or Wednesday night or Saturday for the listening tours.  He reported the structure of the meetings hasn’t been worked on and any ideas should be submitted to the Agenda Team.  He wanted to find out the disconnect between the measures they put out and the response. 


Fleenor suggested that instead of doing a listening tour for each district that they choose it by geography.


Green wanted to make sure these are successful.  He thought it would take a huge effort on everyone’s part.  He asked who was going to coordinate the meetings.


Dwyer thought it needed to be on a short term basis.  He commented that the public comes up with fixes that are not possible.  He said they have to let the public know they are not in control of PERS. He stated that the presentation needs to be consistent with what they have tried and what they are in control of.




a. Announcements






a. Status Report on I-5 Willamette River Bridge Project.


Tim Dodson, ODOT, gave a presentation about the I-5 Willamette River Bridge Project.  (Copy in file).


b. REPORT BACK Permit Refunds.


Craig Starr, Land Management, explained that in Sanitation and Planning they get few permit refunds.  He said they either have done the work or not.   He said there was rarely a case where they have to determine what a permit should be. He indicated that there has been a history of delays.  He commented that things look better with the timeliness of permit refunds compared to three or four years ago.  He noted that no refunds are older than two years.  He indicated that the improvement started a couple of years ago when there was a change in staff assigned to process permit refunds.  He commented that there are limits as to what one part-time person is able to do when she has other responsibilities.


Starr commented that in building there are more permit refunds than the other program areas.  He noted in Sanitation they might get four to six requests for refunds a month.  He added in Building they might get that many in a day.  He said they are more complicated and more people are involved.  He recalled in years past, it was more important to have technical people on board because of concern about getting work out the door than it was to have clerical support staff. 


Starr explained that one of the reasons that permit refunds don’t happen sooner is that they have not been a board priority.  He said getting permits out affects more customers than getting refunds processed.  He indicated that the financial impacts to a customer and a delay in getting their permits out are often times greater than someone waiting for a modest refund.  He thought having work on permits should be the top priority.


Starr started working on simplifying the refund process.  He said because they have to meet government accounting standards related to the public funds, some of their financial accounting processes are onerous.  He didn’t think they would be able to change their accounting practices because they are obligated under law to do certain things.  He said he brought in extra help to work on the refund backlog they have.  He reported in the past week they had processed 12 refunds.  .  He commented that using extra help to do this work without dealing with the underlying systemic problems is not getting them anywhere.


Fleenor thought they should model off a commercial design like a Costco or Walmart.  He asked what the volume of refunds was versus staff time.


Starr replied that for the calendar year 2006, they issued about $41,000 refunds.  He didn’t know if that would cover a full year or not.  He said there is a backlog and had those been done in 2006, he didn’t know how much more than the $41,000 it might have been.


Stewart thought that once they got people into positions in Land Management and have time to work on this that they will see changes.  He commented that the most important thing to him is customer service and getting things done in a timely manner. 


Green said the issue is the shortage of clerical support and no back up positions.  He added that refunds are not as high a priority as getting building permits out.  He wanted to give direction to continue what they are doing about getting permits out.  He thought there could be a way to get to the issue of the refunds.  He thought it would take Board commitment to make refunds a priority and as high as getting permits out.


c. ORDER 07-6-13-6/In the Matter of Amending Lane Manual 60.875 (Lm 60.875) Authorizing The Waste Management Division To Increase Disposal Fees Effective September 1, 2007.


Patti Hansen, Waste Management, indicated that she is presenting a fee increase recommendation from staff and the Finance and Audit Committee.  She reported that Waste Management Division is only funded by fees collected at the landfill and transfer stations.  She added that the division’s enterprise fund operates independent from the general fund and the road fund.   She recalled that Finance and Audit Committee agreed with staff’s recommendation of a $16.50 per ton fee increase.  She added that the committee also recommended an additional increase of $3.50 per ton for a total fee increase of $20.00 per ton, effective September 1, 2007.  She stated that Waste Management Division has not requested a fee increase in 12 years.  She said staff has established a five year financial plan that confirms the $16.50 fee increase per ton will keep the operation stable for four years.  She added that the increase will enable them to make the necessary annual contributions to the landfill development, closure and post closure funds. She said they are required by DEQ to maintain specific balances in the closure and post closure funds at all times.  She indicated the funds are audited annually to ensure they maintain the required DEQ financial assurance balances the division must comply with for operating a landfill. 


Hansen explained that the additional $3.50 per ton increase or $800,000 annually was a recommendation from Finance and Audit to be administered as follows:  1) Nuisance site clean up.  She said a portion of the fees collected shall be used to fund the clean up of nuisance properties identified by Lane County and directed by the Board.  She expected that the majority of the sites will be identified through the Land Management Division Compliance Program.  She indicated that the  Board will set criteria and guidelines to determine which sites are eligible for use of the funds.  She added that the Board will authorize use of funds for each specific clean up project by board order.


With regard to the waste diversion opportunities, Hansen reported that a portion of the fee collected will be used for projects approved by the Board designed to divert or prevent waste material from the landfill including but not limited to research and development.  She added that on a monthly basis 60 percent of the fees collected will be accumulated and maintained for the nuisance site clean up and 40 percent for waste diversion opportunities.  She noted that on or before July 2011, the Board will review collection and utilization of the funds authorized by Lane Manual and may adjust the fees at that time.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 07-6-13-6




VOTE: 5-0.


d. ORDER 07-6-13-7/In the Matter of Electing Whether or Not to Hear Arguments on an Appeal of a Hearing Official's Decision Denying a Request to Change the Zoning of 38 Acres of a 118-Acre Parcel From Non-Impacted Forest Lands (F-1) to Impacted Forest Lands (F-2) as Provided by Lane Code 16.252. (File Pa 06-6054 /Dockum).


Thom Lanfear, Land Management, explained that this is an appeal of a hearing’s official decision.  He noted that the property is located north of Noti along Poodle Creek Road. He said it is a 118 acre parcel and the applicant is proposing to change the zoning of 38 acres from F1 Non-Impacted Forest Lands to F2, Impacted Forest Lands.  He said the hearings official held a hearing on November 16, 2006 and issued a decision on March 29, 2007 and denied the request.  He indicated that a timely appeal was filed by the applicant and his agent.  He said it has come to the Board to decide whether or not they wish to hear the appeal.


Lanfear explained the options are to hear the appeal on the record, to not hear the appeal and remain silent on the hearing’s official’s decision or to not hear argument in the appeal but to expressly agree with the interpretations of the comprehensive plan policies or ordinances made by the hearings official in the decision.  He said in order for the Board to use the option to hear the appeal, there are criteria to make the decision.  He noted there are four criteria listed in Lane Code.  He said if the Board finds that one or more of them is met by the appeal and issues raised in the appeal, they will schedule it for a hearing on the record..  He said the four criteria to be used is whether there is an issue of countywide significance, whether there is an issue that will reoccur with frequency with a need for policy guidance, an issue that involves a unique environmental resource for the planning director or hearings official recommends review.  He indicated that staff has gone through the appeal issues and made an analysis.  He added that the planning director and hearings official do not recommend review.  He said one of the main criteria used to evaluate this zone change proposal is found in Goal 4, and it is tied with some decisions the Board had made in the past.


MOTION: to move Option 2 for ORDER 07-6-13-7.


Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.




a. ORDER 07-6-13-8/In the Matter of Reappointing One Member to Fill Vacancies on the Mental Health Advisory Committee/Local Alcohol and Drug Planning Committee.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 07-6-13-8.




VOTE: 5-0.








Fleenor announced his Coffee and Conversation at Robbie’s Café


Green announced that there will be an MPC Meeting at the Eugene Library.  He also mentioned CVALCO’s annual celebration dinner.


Stewart indicated that Mayor Piercy sent him an e-mail regarding the West 11th Transportation Planning Group.  He said Fleenor was asked to be involved but attendance is hard for him because of the time of the meeting.  Stewart stated that Piercy believes there should be Lane County representation.


Fleenor stated that he tentatively appointed his RAC Advisor, George Goldstein to attend for him.


Stewart asked Fleenor to contact Mayor Piercy so it meets her satisfaction.


13. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660






There being no further business, Commissioner Stewart adjourned the meeting at 3:30 p.m.



Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary